To think being a SAHM/housewife is not the same as someone claiming benefits?

[Jajana]

Was chatting to my sister and was talking about how my MIL is a housewife (sorry not sure if that’s the correct term). She said that being a SAHM/housewife is no different to someone claiming benefits and would rather claim benefits than rely on someone for an income!

Bearing in mind, FIL runs a very successful business and all of the money MIL receives is from private funds - not through the state.

Am i being reasonable to think being a SAHM/housewife isn’t the same as claiming benefits?

@Dillidilly

Sure

As long as roughly equal numbers of men and women are making roughly similar choices.

As long as dads are viewed as being equally responsible for their kids

Isnt that the point of the thread/discussion?

Not really. It was pointing to the distinction between SAHM and people who claim benefits. These activities are indeed different and the reasons for doing them are different.

The point is that choices made by an individual in the context of a patriarchal society aren’t truly free.

To be clear, noone’s saying that women alone are powerless victims - patriarchal culture also disempowers the majority of men (hence my comments about many fathers wanting to spend more time with their children but being held back by patriarchy).

Yeah its clearly moved on

Surely if you dint want to take part in the discussion you don't..

Take part in the discussion?

@MissChanandlerBong80

Yes I agree

Surely if you dint want to take part in the discussion you don't..

Take part in the discussion?

You might so point out that these type of discussions are also a feature of patriarchal oppression. Pit women against each other in order to disenfranchise their power,

But that's not actually relevant to the fact that some women actually want to stay at home with their children.

I know that's not what you want. And that's a completely valid choice.
For women who feel differently, that is also a valid choice.

But I think you're conflating two completely different things here

@hihellohihello

Or you could say they help highlight how we can fight it?

@Dillidilly

I dont think so.

Nothing I've said indicates I dont think the hopefully small number of women who would still want to to couldn't or shouldn't

Traditional stereotypical female roles are devalued. Women who try to compete in traditional male roles are looked over for promotions because they don't have any support figure at home. They resent not the men but those women in the stereotypical support roles. Women have to pay and exploit (usually) other women in those support roles to allow them to work in a traditionally male environment.

What about people who don’t have traditional jobs? Like bitcoin traders? Or properly investors or trust finders? Are they all lazy? Even though they are paying tax? Obvs there are lots of people who work and receive benefits. The argument doesn’t really make any sense to me.

Or you could say they help highlight how we can fight it?

We can help by supporting and valuing women, essentially, in all their choices.

If you truly think that is the take away from your posts I don't know what to say.

@hihellohihello

I disagree

Supporting sexist choices helps no one

@Dillidilly

Oh well.

Your bias is clear too.

Thank you, I'm glad you can see that I support both women who want to work and women who want to stay at home.

Supporting sexist choices helps no one

Within a patriarchal society they are all sexist choices? Why do you value a traditional male role over a traditional female role? Sexism at work.

Within a patriarchal society why do you view traditionally female roles as less valid?

Sexism.

Intrinsically why are caring and nurturing roles seen as less valid than working in finance or law?

@Dillidilly

Lol.

If you say so.

@hihellohihello

I havent said I do.

I've specifically said that I want to see an equal mix of both sexes doing all roles.

I've specifically said that I want to see an equal mix of both sexes doing all roles.

Sorry, I missed that.

No, you're not. It's not the same at all. Plenty of couples I know have a partnership where one earns the money and the other does the childcare/looks after the home by mutual agreement. It's not the same as being out of work and claiming benefits.

Feminisim is about .. choice ..

I would love that to be true but sadly as you see on here, very few people are saying they stopped work as financially they had no other choice. Nor are many owning it and saying they stopped becayse they wanted to.

the most dominant answer being given, sadly, is they did it to support their husbands career so he didn’t need to do any of the domestic shit at home or be bothered with the kids.

it’s like something out of the 50s.